For China's Xi Jinping, attacking Taiwan is about identity – that's what makes it so dangerous

Authored by abc.net.au and submitted by whoneedsusernames

China's future does not hinge on Taiwan — it is already on track to become the biggest economy in the world and its military strength already makes it a formidable regional power.

Some 700 million people have been lifted out of poverty in China over the last four decades. The nation's eyes are turned westward, extending its economic clout across Central Asia into the Middle East and Africa. The massive Belt and Road investment and infrastructure project promises to be a 21st century silk-road.

China's close relationship with Pakistan has won it control over the port of Gwadar, a gateway to the Persian Gulf. Its Shanghai Cooperation Organisation includes all the Central Asian states.

China's Westward Expansion strategy seeks to secure the supply of energy resources from the Middle East. To China, Westward Expansion seeks to gain a vital edge over the US.

As the Diplomat Magazine has pointed out, "from Central Asia to the Middle East, no country falls within the sphere of direct US influence or poses a potential threat to China".

So if the West promises wealth and power, why is Xi Jinping seemingly so obsessed with controlling Taiwan — at the risk of a war that could shatter all China has built?

Yet Xi is ramping up the threats and intimidation. This past week China sent a record number of fighter jets to buzz Taiwan in a simulated attack.

Earlier in the week, Taiwan's Foreign Minister, Joseph Wu, told the ABC's China Tonight that Taiwan feels threatened and is preparing for war.

Taiwan: The symbol of the Xi presidency?

Is this a battle China needs? In many ways it has already won. Very few countries in the world recognise Taiwan; the island is locked out of international bodies.

Taiwan needs China more than China needs Taiwan. It is Taiwan's biggest trading partner. China's military muscle clearly outguns Taiwan's.

Yet Xi has made it clear he will risk war to unify Taiwan with the mainland. He has set a date of 2049 — the 100th anniversary of the communist revolution in China — to complete the unification project.

But the man who has already changed China's constitution to make himself "President for life" will likely not wait another three decades. Some close observers speculate he could make a move within the next five years.

Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume. Watch Duration: 38 seconds 38 s Taiwan Foreign Minister Joseph Wu will "fight to the end"

It is as if Taiwan is the symbol of the Xi presidency, his shot at Communist Party immortality. Taiwan is unfinished business — a leftover from Mao's revolution, when the rival nationalists fled across the Taiwan strait and established the Republic of China, what would become a democratic state, "independent" without having to formally declare it.

When Xi talks about "reunification" it must be remembered the Communist Party has never ruled Taiwan.

But it exerts a powerful hold on Chinese identity. Taiwan forms part of the "hundred years of humiliation" from the mid 19th century Opium Wars with Britain, fall of the Qing empire in the early 20th century and the colonisation of China by foreign powers.

Taiwan was occupied by Japan during the Sino-Japanese war in 1895 and not relinquished until after World War II. As the Peterson Institute for International Economics has pointed out, Taiwan is a "lingering symbol of China's victimhood".

Taiwan is strategically important. The island was referred to as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" when the US maintained military bases there. During the Cold War Taiwan was central to US efforts to contain communism.

Beijing remains concerned about being surrounded by foreign powers.

But the US and China have long maintained an uneasy status quo around "one China" — albeit interpreted differently on either side of the Taiwan Strait.

Why the Taiwan issue is flaring again

Since President Nixon sat down with Chairman Mao in 1972, beginning a rapprochement with the Cold War rivals, China-US commitment to a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan question has remained front and centre.

The language has changed over time and there have been moments where it has reached flashpoint — most recently in 1996, when China carried out missile tests toward Taiwan causing panic. The US marshalled its forces in the Taiwan Strait in what was the biggest display of American military might since the Vietnam War.

What happened in 1996 is crucial to understanding why the Taiwan issue is flaring again.

Xi judges that China's moment is coming and that the US today is a diminished power. ( Reuters: Jason Lee

War was averted 25 years ago and a new balance struck. Regional countries including Australia reaffirmed their commitment to a one China policy.

But seeds of suspicion and resentment were sown. China had to acquiesce to American military power. Chinese pride was hurt and it has since accelerated its military build up.

It has focused on building a defence force that can neutralise US naval power and fight and win a regional war. Leading US military figures have already suggested China has shifted the military status quo.

The US is beefing up its alliances now — including with Australia — in response to China's growing strength and its increasing assertiveness.

Much is made of Xi Jinping's threat to use force against Taiwan. But this is nothing new. In 1996, then Chinese president Jiang Zemin refused to relinquish the threat of force, although he pledged to work towards a peaceful reunification.

In 1996, a young Xi Jinping was an aspiring communist party leader, deputy secretary in Fujian province. Fujian faces Taiwan, from where hundreds of medium-range missiles are aimed directly across the strait.

Xi well remembers the stand-off in 1996. He tells his people over and over that China will not be humiliated again.

Xi judges that China's moment is coming and that the US today is a diminished power.

Attacking Taiwan is not strategic — it is not logical and it is not even necessary. It is emotional and it is about identity. These things often make no sense — and that's what makes it so dangerous.

Stan Grant presents China Tonight on Monday at 9.35pm on ABC TV, and Tuesday at 8pm on ABC News Channel.

pablojohns on October 10th, 2021 at 02:24 UTC »

Here’s an interesting take I haven’t seen posted here yet.

What if the timing isn’t ideal for China in most typical ways right now. However, it’s a perfect time to exploit divisions within their primary hegemonic adversary: the United States.

Think about it this way - taking Taiwan by force is a major gamble. It will have negative consequences with global sanctions, weakened trade, will exacerbate global supply chain issues, and take away some of the goodwill China has accumulated in the last few decades.

However, now may be the most ideal time to strike. The United States, through both public opinion and political ideology, has backed off being the global police in a lot of areas. There is a unique, cross-partisan majority opinion INSIDE the US that they should not get involved in international issues, especially those involving US forces, when American interests are not directly at risk.

And let’s be real here - Taiwan does not serve much of a US purpose at this time.

Additionally, a Chinese takeover of Taiwan has the added benefit of stoking the partisan fires in the US. If the Biden administration is still in power, hawkish Republicans will use it as a cudgel against the current admin to claim they’re weak and can’t exert American power. On the flip side, should a more hawkish admin be in place, the pacifist groups that exist in both parties will push back greatly on any US threat of use of force against China in relation to Taiwan.

Frankly, if I were China, the next few years would be the best time to do this. However, I still think the geopolitical risks make this a very dangerous proposition. While I don’t think this would escalate to a nuclear conflict, it is quite possible that the US does not back down on this and you see a serious engagement, especially at the cyber level, which could greatly weaken China as a rising global power. After all, China would be the aggressor here. The US standing up for freedom and democracy would be much more well received globally compared to other US military missions in the last 50 years.

din0d0nut on October 10th, 2021 at 01:07 UTC »

In what world is Taiwan not strategic? It is the single most important piece of territory outside Chinas mainland to the CCP.

China is completely hemmed in on all sides. South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam are rival nations that with the help of the US navy can completely contain the Chinese navy in the East & South China Sea. The sea is so shallow in this part of the pacific too that there is very little places for even submarines to be able to slip out into open water without being detected.

The land borders are hardly much better. Other than North Korea and Mongolia to some extent, China has poor or terrible relations with all its other neighbors (and it’s not like either Mongolia or DPRK are best buddies with China either). Even if these countries were all friendly, shipping goods thousands of miles across the largest continent in the world over mountains and deserts is incredibly expensive and vulnerable.

The vast majority of Chinas trade and economy flows in and out via the Sea, and Chinas rivals currently block China in by sea. Taiwan would be a stepping stone out into the pacific and the world at large and would vastly improve the strategic standing of the Chinese military.

Idk what this article is talking about when it says that the Belt and Road initiative makes Taiwan unnecessary, and that Chinas economic and military growth mean it doesn’t need Taiwan. Land trade over thousands of miles will never make up for global sea shipping. That’s like saying if the US somehow got blockaded, we’d be fine because could ship in goods through Mexico and Canada. Not to mention that nearly all the countries in the belt and road initiative have mixed relations with China and aren’t exactly lining up to be puppet states. The article mentions Pakistan, and pakistan China relations are frosty at best. Even if pakistan remained an ally of China during some hypothetical conflict, it couldn’t serve as a replacement for sea shipping.

All this to say, I seriously disagree with saying that Taiwan is not strategically important.

whoneedsusernames on October 9th, 2021 at 19:38 UTC »

Hi all, I'm a big fan of this sub and it's standard of discussion, so apologies for any short comings.

SS:

This opinion piece states that:

"Attacking Taiwan is not strategic — it is not logical and it is not even necessary. It is emotional and it is about identity. These things often make no sense — and that's what makes it so dangerous."

Less rationality naturally makes a situation more dangerous, China has helped manufacturer one of its most pressing issues which it seems willing to pay a high cost for. Timing is playing an important part too, with an aging population and a mandated reclamation date of 2049 at the latest being set - the 100th anniversary of the communist revolution in China.

It's clear the stakes are high with the situation of Taiwan - with the potential to crack the geopolitical order.